Delectable tidbits from around the web:

-- Matt Cooper at Portfolio finds the McCain-lobbyist story ''a weird piece'': ''The long-awaited New York Times story about John McCain and what the Times calls a 'female lobbyist' --wink, wink, nudge, nudge -- finally appeared today under a headline called 'For McCain, Self-Confidence on Ethics Poses Its Own Risk.' The Times story is part of its series on the candidates called 'The Long Run.' Please.

''This is classic journalistic doblespeak.''

-- Jon Friedman of Market Watch was even harsher in his judgment: ''The piece raised the possibility that McCain had had a fling with a lobbyist 31 years his junior. It offered no legitimate basis, other than the whispers of unnamed sources -- the most questionable form of reporting in a democratic society.
McCain said in a televised press conference Thursday morning from Ohio that the story was 'not true' and added that he was 'very disappointed' in the Times.

''The story smacks of tabloid fodder, which makes it all the more inexplicable. The New York Times prides itself on having an Olympian reputation among media outlets. Its high-minded slogan, 'All the news that's fit to print,' underscores its commitment to quality journalism 'without fear or favor.'

''Those journalistic ideals don't look so impressive today.''

James Kirchick of TNR's The Plank writes: ''So here's the essence of the Times' 3,000-word 'bombshell' on John McCain.

''John Weaver, whom McCain fired last summer (identified in the Times piece as 'now an informal campaign adviser' to McCain, which sounds like a puffed-up euphemism for 'unemployed') says that 8 years ago, he and two other former employees who have since 'become disillusioned' (read: disgruntled), suspected that McCain was having an affair with a lobbyist.

''The rest of the article, rehashing old news about the Keating Five, is, as Rich Lowry says, complete 'window dressing.'''

(image via portfolio)